'We both want the best for Singapore': Ex-NMP Calvin Cheng resolves differences with ex-SDP chairman over Gaza comments, Singapore News
Cheng sued Mahmood over a Facebook post made in March this year about Cheng's comments on activists who disrupted a Meet-the-People Session in Chong Pang.
Mahmood had said that Cheng, who proposed sending the activists to Gaza as long as they did not return, was an Islamophobe and a threat to racial and religious harmony to Singapore.
Cheng has since apologised for his comments and said he should have been more sensitive.
On Mahmood's accusations, Cheng said in April that they were "factual inaccuracies" and "outright lies", and took legal action against him.
In a Facebook post on Tuesday (Aug 12), Mahmood said that he has met with Cheng to "speak to each other frankly and civilly".
He added that he has retracted all of his statements against Cheng after accepting he is "neither a racist nor an Islamophobe".
"While I thought Mr Cheng was insensitive, which he accepts, I now recognise that I was too harsh in some of my other comments," he said. "In light of our meeting and further information made available to me, we both agreed to resolve our differences amicably and the court case."
[embed]https://www.facebook.com/mohamed.j.mahmood/posts/10230561594084109?ref=embed_post[/embed]
Separately, Cheng confirmed in a Facebook post the same day that Mahmood had retracted all of the statements made against him.
'Gaza is a divisive and emotive issue. But as Singaporeans, we can agree to disagree,' he said. 'I met up with Mr Jufrie at my lawyers' offices. We agreed we both want the best for Singapore.'
[embed]https://www.facebook.com/calvinchengnmp/posts/1315110769973560?ref=embed_post[/embed]
[[nid:716602]]
Chingshijie@asiaone.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Online Citizen
2 hours ago
- Online Citizen
Lawyer flags potential inaccuracy in Minister Ong's 'no penalties' claim, citing Lianhe Zaobao report
On 4 August, veteran food critic KF Seetoh alleged in a Facebook post that hawkers at Bukit Canberra Hawker Centre were contractually required to provide 60 free charity meals per month under a 'Pay It Forward' scheme, and that penalties could be imposed for non-participation. On 11 August, Minister for Health Ong Ye Kung — who is also the Member of Parliament for Sembawang GRC, where the hawker centre is located — responded on Facebook. He stated: 'There are no penalties if they do not or are unable to provide the meals. This simple, well-intentioned initiative was meant to encourage our hawkers to 'Pay-It-Forward'. In any case, the initiative has yet to commence.' Ong's post sought to clarify that the programme was voluntary in spirit, not enforced, and carried no consequences for non-participation. However, on 13 August, Lianhe Zaobao reported it had reviewed stallholder contracts signed in 2022 and found that they did contain penalty clauses tied to both the charity meal scheme and a loyalty programme. Each breach would result in six demerit points and a S$50 fine. Accumulating 12 points within a year could prevent lease renewal, while 24 points could lead to lease termination. The next day, 14 August, Singapore lawyer Yeoh Lian Chuan referred to Zaobao's report in a Facebook post. He argued that Ong's statement was, in his opinion, 'false or misleading within the meaning of POFMA' because it could convey to at least some readers that no penalty clauses existed at all — rather than that they simply were not being enforced yet. Yeoh stressed that he believed any inaccuracy was likely due to inadequate briefing rather than deliberate misrepresentation. Nonetheless, he saw the case as 'yet another illustration' of why POFMA is, in his view, 'a bad law'. Context: POFMA's scope and one-sided powers The Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) allows only ministers to issue correction or takedown directions. In practice, this means a minister could only be subject to a correction direction if another minister chose to issue one — a scenario that has not occurred. The Bukit Canberra Hawker Centre case involves a Social Enterprise Hawker Centre (SEHC), part of a government-managed public policy framework. In theory, the matter could have warranted a POFMA direction from the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment, just as the Minister for Manpower previously issued one over reports by a Chinese-language site, The Online Citizen (TOC) and Gutzy Asia about the identity of a woman who had taken her own life. Critics argue this shows POFMA's reach over public policy issues — but also its one-sided nature, since ministers themselves are outside its enforcement scope. Past use of POFMA on media reporting The Online Citizen (TOC) has received multiple POFMA correction directions over the years, often not for its own editorial statements but for its reporting of remarks made by third parties. In The Online Citizen Pte Ltd v Attorney-General [2021] SGCA 96, the Court of Appeal affirmed that under POFMA, it is the issuing minister who has the legal prerogative to determine the meaning of the statement in question. The court held that challenges must be mounted on whether the statement is false as interpreted by the minister, rather than on whether that interpretation is the most reasonable or accurate reading in the eyes of the public. This ruling places a high burden on recipients of POFMA directions. A publisher must prove that the statement, in the meaning assigned by the minister, is true — even if the publisher disputes that this was the meaning they conveyed or intended. The judgment did not examine how this broad interpretive power interacts with constitutional rights to freedom of expression under Article 14 of the Singapore Constitution, focusing instead on statutory compliance and process validity. Critics say this creates a one-sided enforcement structure. Because only ministers can issue correction directions, there is no public mechanism to compel corrections from ministers themselves, even if their own statements are later shown to be inaccurate. Following two such correction directions in 2024 and 2025 — over TOC's reporting on questions about People's Action Party ministers' sale and purchase of Good Class Bungalows and the circumstances surrounding state-owned rental property — TOC was once again classified as a Declared Online Location. This designation makes it illegal for the site to receive financial benefits from its operations for the next two years, effectively crippling its ability to sustain itself commercially. By contrast, Bloomberg and The Edge Singapore, both of which have been the subject of more than three POFMA 'statements of fact' over their reporting, have not been issued with a Declared Online Location order. Despite repeated queries, the Ministry of Digital Development and Information has not provided a direct explanation for this apparent double standard. Minister Ong, who is also the Member of Parliament for Sembawang GRC where Bukit Canberra Hawker Centre is located, has not publicly addressed the apparent discrepancy between his 'no penalties' statement and Zaobao's reporting of the penalty clauses in stallholders' contracts.
Straits Times
6 hours ago
- Straits Times
Three top students with passion to serve awarded President's Scholarship
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox SINGAPORE - From championing justice and inspiring young scientists to build a greener, more inclusive home, the three President's Scholarship recipients for 2025 share a common drive – to serve. Ms Hilary Chee, 18, Ms Clarissa Nguyen, 19, and Mr Kaleb Teo, 19, each turned a personal passion into projects serving the community, which include integrating migrant workers into the larger society, mentoring girls in astronomy and organising programmes for underprivileged families. They received their scholarship awards from President Tharman Shanmugaratnam at a ceremony held at The Fullerton Hotel on Aug 14. About 70 guests were in attendance, including Defence Minister and Coordinating Minister for Public Services Chan Chun Sing and Mr Tharman's spouse, Ms Jane Ittogi. While the public sector awards many scholarships each year to promising young Singaporeans, the President's Scholarship is awarded to those whom the Public Service Commission (PSC) assessed to have the most outstanding package of traits, including all-round excellence and leadership potential, said Mr Tharman. Mr Teo, from Hwa Chong Institution, will be heading to Oxford University. Ms Chee and Ms Nguyen, both from Raffles Institution, will be heading to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard University respectively. In his speech, Mr Tharman stressed that receiving the President's Scholarship is a privilege. 'Don't let it get to your head, or mistake excellence for superiority,' he said. 'The scholarship does not set you for life.' Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore Bukit Merah fire: Residents relocated as town council conducts restoration works Singapore askST: What to do in the event of a fire at home Singapore Jalan Bukit Merah fire: PMD battery could have started fatal blaze, says SCDF Singapore askST: What are the fire safety rules for PMDs? Asia AirAsia flight from KL to Incheon lands at wrong airport in South Korea Opinion Could telco consolidation spell the end of attractive mobile plans? Singapore Change in law proposed to pave the way for public-private sector data sharing Singapore From quiet introvert to self-confident student: How this vulnerable, shy teen gets help to develop and discover her strength What it does, said the President, is put on its recipients an added commitment – to put their every ability into serving the people of Singapore. The award also comes with the responsibility on scholarship holders to keep developing through the course of their public service careers. This mean staying informed about new ideas, thinking deeply about alternative options and building relationships with a wide range of people, said Mr Tharman. 'Always look for ways to collaborate with others and build team strengths, both within the public service and with groups in civic society.' While the Republic has to face today's more profoundly uncertain world as a small island state with no natural resources of its own, Mr Tharman said Singaporeans know the country's future does not depend on what it has, but on its people, its collective aspirations, drive and ability to work together at home and with partners abroad. On its part, the public service must keep evolving to respond both to external challenges and Singaporeans' changing needs. Its officers must have greater depth of expertise than before, drawing on diverse views, and be prepared to adapt or retire policies that no longer serve the country well, he added. Yet public policy must also continue to be underpinned by the overarching moral principles that have guided Singapore from the early years till today, said Mr Tharman. '(This is) the conviction a better society is possible, where every individual and community is equally worthy of respect, and where we only uplift ourselves when we uplift others with us.'
Straits Times
21 hours ago
- Straits Times
Forum: Address housing needs of vulnerable groups
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox W e are pleased that the Government is reviewing the age floor for singles buying Housing Board flats with a view to lowering it. However, there remain those who, due to their life circumstances, find themselves ineligible or severely restricted from buying an HDB flat as singles. This leaves them in precarious housing situations – often dependent on rental markets they cannot afford, or in temporary arrangements that hinder their ability to rebuild their lives. Four groups merit urgent attention: Unmarried single parents Many are primary caregivers doing the heavy lifting of raising children alone, often with limited income and support. Yet because their children are considered 'illegitimate' under current rules, they cannot form a recognised family nucleus with them, making it harder to secure a home. Transnational parents of children who are Singaporeans or permanent residents These are foreigners who are widowed, divorced, or separated parents who are the caregivers of their children. Despite the children's right to grow up in Singapore, such parents can face significant obstacles in securing stable housing, leaving families in uncertainty. Single survivors of domestic abuse Leaving an abusive relationship is already an act of immense courage, but current housing rules can trap survivors in unsafe environments or force them into unstable arrangements that risk retraumatisation. Access to stable housing for this vulnerable group of people should be prioritised. Young adults leaving residential care homes at 21 Unlike peers growing up with their parents, they lack the support, guidance, or safety net of a family home as they navigate adulthood. At this stage, many are financially precarious – still studying, serving national service, or working in jobs that do not pay very much. HDB could provide the option of affordable rental housing for such young adults to share, giving them a stable starting point in life. The existing eligibility rules for singles do not adequately account for exceptional circumstances where housing is a basic necessity, not a lifestyle choice. We need clearly defined, compassionate exceptions in HDB policy that recognise these groups as urgent cases, allowing them to qualify for public housing regardless of age or marital status. Such provisions would not only address immediate shelter needs, but also prevent downstream social costs. Ensuring that these vulnerable individuals have a secure roof over their heads is a measure of our collective humanity. Sugidha Nithiananthan Director, Advocacy and Research Association of Women for Action and Research
